Working prisons? Or prisons that work

Keeping people locked up is
costly and ineffective, the Coalition government said of the British prison
system when it came to power in June 2010. Now the talk is of giving prisoners
40-hour working weeks. So what happened to those early promises of putting
rehabilitation first, asks Seb Klier

Share this

Read more!

Get our weekly email

Enter your email address

The British criminal
justice system was about to undergo a ‘rehabilitation revolution’, said the
Coalition Government when it first came to power in June 2010. For too long,
ministers said, focus on custody and punishment had taken precedence over
rehabilitation. Ken Clarke, appointed Secretary of State for Justice, even spoke of ‘a
costly and ineffectual approach that fails’. As a result of this
approach, the courts were clogged up with persistent offenders and a record UK
prison population at the time of over 85,000 people, costing the state an
average of £45,000 a year per prisoner. Prisoners were stuck in a revolving
door of crime and incarceration, with too many barriers to breaking this cycle.
A new rehabilitative approach was needed to turn around decades-old problems.

But recently the
government has appeared afraid of using the ‘R’ word. It reportedly removed the
word ‘rehabilitation’ from the title of the ongoing Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of
Offenders Bill and inserting the word ‘punishment’ to make it sound more
punitive. There is strikingly little mention of rehabilitation in the body of
the bill. So what shape is the Justice Secretary’s revolution taking?

One idea linked to the
‘R’ word has remained in public debate: that of ‘working prisons’ which the
Government has talked of doubling. This policy,
as described by Ken Clarke, is that the prison regime is adapted to allow
prisoners to work 40 hours a week, thus ensuring they are kept busy, learn new
skills that might improve employability on release and are able to put some of
their wages back into funds for victims of crime.

For those involved in
reform of the criminal justice system, such a policy would appear to tick many
boxes. Prisoners do not languish for years doing nothing and are more likely to
get jobs on the outside (where employment has been strongly linked to reduced
reoffending). In addition, the income earned can give better support to victims
of crime. But like many such schemes, the policy of ‘working prisons’ can be
implemented in a number of ways. To be effective, it needs to be done
correctly. If it is not properly linked to education programmes, the ‘working
prison’ idea may not be at all rehabilitative.

Introducing 40-hour
working weeks involves a complete overturn of current prison regimes, including
the functioning of education departments. There are already many practical and
logistical obstacles to learning in prisons. A crude expansion of working hours
would obviously further reduce the time available for formal education.
Detailed planning of how work would fit into a prison regime is needed to avoid
it having a negative impact on
other purposeful activities. So far this has not been evident.

Equally, the kind of
work to be undertaken in prisons is absolutely central to whether or not it
will be rehabilitative. If the new ‘working prisons’ are merely an expansion of
current prison industries, it would be reasonable to question the real purpose
of the policy.

Much of the work
currently undertaken in prison is menial, repetitive and low-skilled. It
involves tasks such as counting piles of screws and putting airline headphones
into plastic bags for hours on end. Projects that involve genuine vocational
training and offer varied work are rare.

Merely expanding the
current prison work regimes would look more like additional punishment than
rehabilitation. Furthermore, it would be unlikely to achieve the ultimate goal
of reducing re-offending. Shredding paper does not make offenders more
employable, boost self-esteem or inspire them once they leave prison. Nor does labeling tins or repackaging
food products. None of these kinds of work provide prisoners with new skills,
qualifications or opportunities to learn. In fact, they are a good way of
making work seem more unappealing and of encouraging the notion that crime is
the only viable life-choice.

Education requires
commitment

Currently, prisoners are
frequently paid higher wages for doing low-skilled prison industry work than
they would receive doing education or vocational training. This encourages them
to go for the short-term financial gain when learning or training might provide
a more sustainable route to long-term financial security. The financial
advantage and opportunity to leave their cells is sufficient incentive to many
prisoners to engage in prison work. They don’t see it as something to aspire
to, or a step towards other employment. When the Prisoners’ Education Trust
asked them about their experience of tasks in prisons, it received responses
such as: ‘I have learnt nothing from any of them’ and ‘Most prison activities
fail to provide any realistic and marketable job skills’.

Education, on the other
hand, requires commitment and provides tangible skills, knowledge and
qualifications. Given current high levels of unemployment, these skills become
more important than ever in finding a job in the world outside. An educational
programme can also provide vital ‘soft skills’ such as teamwork, integrity and
patience, highly valued by potential employers and colleagues.

If we are to reduce
reoffending and therefore minimise costs in the criminal justice sector, prison
work has to be part of a programme of rehabilitation rather than punishment. It
needs to provide education and qualifications, be interesting and be linked to
realistic employment possibilities on release.

Education can be
transformative. Everyone has the right to appropriate education and learning.
Each prisoner will benefit from different courses, from vocational training
through to academic study. By providing both educational and working
opportunities we create greater possibilities of rehabilitation.

Working prisons will
need to focus on learning in its broadest sense; the work undertaken should not
be so menial that it allows no opportunity for progression or training. This
may mean vocational placements or accredited apprenticeships, but also
implementing work that develops soft skills, or improves core educational
skills such as literacy, numeracy and digital understanding. All should be
appreciated as ‘work’.

Beyond prison

Wherever possible,
working prisons should link their programmes to resettlement, with
opportunities to continue work, education and training on release, including
the potential for self-employment. This means more schemes that replicate
external work within the prison estate, and more opportunities for newly
released prisoners to work on temporary license. It also means expanding
provision of education for prisoners. Schemes such as the Timpson Academies,
which teach prisoners shoe repair and then provide jobs on release, could be
replicated across other industries. The Timpson scheme was the brainchild of a
few committed individuals; unfortunately, it is not normal practice. But the
penal system needs to explore the potential for such schemes.

Rehabilitation
is a long and difficult process that involves equipping prisoners with the
confidence, ability and qualifications to succeed in education and work outside
prison. It requires a long-term vision and the persistence to follow it
through. The Government has identified an important issue but must now bring
long-term thinking into the working prisons concept. If it does not its
‘rehabilitation revolution’ will not be worthy of the name. Part of such a
revolution can be to extend work in prisons but it must be connected to the
wider learning and resettlement process. We will only reduce reoffending if
prisoners are given skills to support themselves and opportunities to change
their lives.

Related

This article is published under a Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. If you have any
queries about republishing please
contact us.
Please check individual images for licensing details.